I used to work with a guy who put 93 octane in his mustang. One of those facepalm moments I should have just let go. I tried to reason with him, explaining that the specifications for his engine called for 87 and that the engineers who designed the engine knew more about it than he did. Of course it didn't work.

abadabba:I used to work with a guy who put 93 octane in his mustang. One of those facepalm moments I should have just let go. I tried to reason with him, explaining that the specifications for his engine called for 87 and that the engineers who designed the engine knew more about it than he did. Of course it didn't work.

Did he have an intake that brought in more air and a new engine tune to calibrate to it? Because if so he probably had it set for 93 octane and anything less could make his engine knock. Of course, if it was bone stock then yes, he's an idiot.

italie:10. It's not a myth if it was appropriate commentary on the product, AND was a quote from his autobiography.

9. If your gearing changes, you have the potential to go faster than the gear prior.

8. If the engine can handle the additional power needed o turn the wheel, yes, you are traveling farther per revolution. That can translate to "faster".

7. I'll allow it.

6. Depends on the motor. Very much so.

5. I'll allow it.

4. Not a myth, but not technically feasible/viable.

3. "Safer" vs "can't stop in the snow" is a silly comparison.

2. No there aren't secrets. All of those things listed are out in the open. Who thought otherwise?

1. Why would you do this? Who believes this?

some cars actually hit their top speed in a gear lower than their highest. 6th gear in many modern sorts car is the gear to loaf along at 75, but if you are going really fast , all the air you are pushing out of the way taxes the motor. It's just like if you were going up a steep grade, and you do better in fifth.

italie:9. If your gearing changes, you have the potential to go faster than the gear prior.

No, you're spinning your engine at a lower rpm, and likely torque range, mostly for the benefits of better gas mileage. If the combination of forces opposing your vehicle's direction of travel are now greater than the torque your engine is producing you will slow down. Additionally, most cars built today can reach their maximum speed limited by wind resistance in fourth gear of a 5 speed transmission. That means that in both cases of acceleration and top speed you will go "faster" in fourth gear than in overdrive because it gives you a better mechanical advantage. The only reason fifth gear exists is for gas mileage.

8. If the engine can handle the additional power needed o turn the wheel, yes, you are traveling farther per revolution. That can translate to "faster".

No, it doesn't. If your engine can push a 22" rim 0-60 in 5 seconds, it will be able to push a smaller, lighter, rim there in less time. Assuming you use the same material in both, putting a larger rimmed tire on your car will slow down your acceleration and reduce your top speed every time. Putting larger rimmed tires on a car has the end effect of lowering your final gear ratio, similar to the effect of using "overdrive". However, unlike simple gearing, the added weight and effort required to move those giant wheels in all gears causes an overall loss of gas mileage, so in addition to the loss of top speed and acceleration, it pretty much means you fail all around. You can look very "gangsta" in the process, though.

My brother-in-law has forgotten more about cars and engines than I'll ever know, so I was dumbfounded to learn he had no idea that "wind chill" is a subjective measurement of perceived heat loss on living tissue, and has absolutely no meaning to cars or engines. DUMBFOUNDED, I SAY!

Does anyone actually believe that bigger wheels make your car faster? I've heard a lot of people say some truly idiotic things about cars in my day, but I've never once heard anyone claim their oversized rims give them any sort of performance increase. It's about appearances, not performance. I always figured gigantic rims were a penis substitute for people that couldn't afford a sports car.

timujin:HulkHands: timujin: I don't know anyone that believes any of those except for the first.

/me too, for what it matters//good to know, though, that red one looks great

Really, you don't know anyone that believes they need an oil change every 3k?

Well, I don't actually know, I don't bring that up with many people. However, I do have to admit that I know someone who did, but then I told her to look at her auto manual, which specified every 5000 miles.

yeah -- idk about 3000 miles but i do change it every 5000. You can push to 6000 on newer vehicles.. The oil starts looking pretty dark at a certain point. I doubt the common engines on the road are built so well that they don't need a change of filter every once in awhile.

Not everyone drives a vehicle around a nice plowed city. A once in a while 700 kilometer trek across northern Canada can put some wear and tear on vehicles and proper maintenance is learned or learned the heard way.

This photo shows what every winter in Wisconsin was like, 1998-2004. By then, SUV drivers pretty much figured out that their vehicles didn't confer magical frictiony superpowers and they stopped driving like idiots when the roads got slippery.

Every snowfall, one of those dorks would tailgate me on the freeway when it was snowy and I'd think to myself "Didn't you see those 4 SUVs in the ditch the last two miles, you moron??"

Your CS reminds of when my wife and I were driving back to Indianapolis from Knoxville a few years ago. While we were driving up I75, it was raining pretty good, and cold. While driving, I noticed the freeze line on the trees was getting closer to the road, so I slowed down. All these crazy people from down there, apparently not understanding what was about to happen, just kept driving 80mph. Just south of Lexington, it starting looking like a war zone. Cars off the side of the road, flipped cars in the median, semi-trucks laying on their sides, and me driving through there at 30mph. I64 was like that all the way to Louisville. We even saw one semi up underneath a bridge, on the wrong side of the columns. We never got to actually see any of the wrecks, just the aftermath.

StrangeQ:italie:9. If your gearing changes, you have the potential to go faster than the gear prior.

No, you're spinning your engine at a lower rpm, and likely torque range, mostly for the benefits of better gas mileage. If the combination of forces opposing your vehicle's direction of travel are now greater than the torque your engine is producing you will slow down. Additionally, most cars built today can reach their maximum speed limited by wind resistance in fourth gear of a 5 speed transmission. That means that in both cases of acceleration and top speed you will go "faster" in fourth gear than in overdrive because it gives you a better mechanical advantage. The only reason fifth gear exists is for gas mileage.

8. If the engine can handle the additional power needed o turn the wheel, yes, you are traveling farther per revolution. That can translate to "faster".

No, it doesn't. If your engine can push a 22" rim 0-60 in 5 seconds, it will be able to push a smaller, lighter, rim there in less time. Assuming you use the same material in both, putting a larger rimmed tire on your car will slow down your acceleration and reduce your top speed every time. Putting larger rimmed tires on a car has the end effect of lowering your final gear ratio, similar to the effect of using "overdrive". However, unlike simple gearing, the added weight and effort required to move those giant wheels in all gears causes an overall loss of gas mileage, so in addition to the loss of top speed and acceleration, it pretty much means you fail all around. You can look very "gangsta" in the process, though.

8. You completely missed half of each sentence. Negate the engine, the torque, and you are left with basic principles. At the wheel, at a constant RPM, you will go faster on a larger rim / taller tire. A move from 275/60 to a 275/70 tire would be near negligible to a decent motor, and probably add a mph overall. It's not worth piss from a significance standpoint, but it makes their statement false.

9. I'm not disagreeing with your statement. I can't agree flatly with theirs either. They aren't talking about torque ranges or cars built today. They made a blanket statement that isn't true.

Larger tires change the final drive ratio of a vehicle, just as an overdrive reduces revs at a given speed, larger diameter tires alter the rev count as the tire is making less complete revolutions to cover the previous ground crossed by the smaller tire. Or: if a car with normal rims hits 2100 rpm at 60 mph, the larger diameter reduces that. This is why people who alter tire ratio end up having to correct the discrepancy at the speedometer.

azxj:How about the "don't run your tank low or it will suck the crap from the bottom of the tank" myth? Umm... the fuel pickup tube is already at the bottom of the tank.

Now there are other reasons not to run your tank low - like the in-tank fuel pumps which use the fuel to cool them. But "sucking crap from the bottom" is not one of them.

Not knowing much about this aside from schooling and anecdotal evidence, I always imagined this to be true. Somewhat like certain bottles of wine; the closer one gets to the bottom of the bottle, the denser the sediment becomes.

italie:8. If the engine can handle the additional power needed o turn the wheel, yes, you are traveling farther per revolution. That can translate to "faster".

No, it doesn't. If your engine can push a 22" rim 0-60 in 5 seconds, it will be able to push a smaller, lighter, rim there in less time. Assuming you use the same material in both, putting a larger rimmed tire on your car will slow down your acceleration and reduce your top speed every time. Putting larger rimmed tires on a car has the end effect of lowering your final gear ratio, similar to the effect of using "overdrive". However, unlike simple gearing, the added weight and effort required to move those giant wheels in all gears causes an overall loss of gas mileage, so in addition to the loss of top speed and acceleration, it pretty much means you fail all around. You can look very "gangsta" in the process, though.

8. You completely missed half of each sentence. Negate the engine, the torque, and you are left with basic principles. At the wheel, at a constant RPM, you will go faster on a larger rim / taller tire. A move from 275/60 to a 275/70 tire would be near negligible to a decent motor, and probably add a mph overall. It's not worth piss from a significance standpoint, but it makes their statement false.

You should call up NASCAR and tell them to start putting 19" tires instead of 15" on all their race cars then.

Does this apply to cars where the body style is the only difference? I'm thinking like Accord and Accord Coupe and Altima and Altima Coupe. That a Camaro would have higher insurance than a Malibu would make sense, but those cars are quite a bit different. The first two pairs listed are functionally the same car.

I was expecting to see the myth that if you drive a truck with the tailgate down, it'll improve your gas mileage. Leaving disappointed that not only was it not in the article, it wasn't mentioned here on fark, either.

Who thought this? It just means that you're past 1:1 in the gear box and you're now operating the engine at a mechanical disadvantage.

What if you're in 4th gear, the engine rev limiter has kicked in, so you can't go any faster? A quick shift into overdrive will make you go faster.

Most cars will hit top speed from wind resistance in fourth gear before the rev limiter kicks in.

My last two cars were not limited by wind resistance. The Stratus would hit the rev limiter, the Alero had a governor.

I'm assuming wind resistance as a top speed limiter is much more common in vans, SUV's, and trucks, but I'm pretty sure most passenger cars, especially now in the world of 250+ HP V6 Camries, reach their limit by other means.

LazarusLong42:italie: 8. If the engine can handle the additional power needed o turn the wheel, yes, you are traveling farther per revolution. That can translate to "faster".

No, it doesn't. If your engine can push a 22" rim 0-60 in 5 seconds, it will be able to push a smaller, lighter, rim there in less time. Assuming you use the same material in both, putting a larger rimmed tire on your car will slow down your acceleration and reduce your top speed every time. Putting larger rimmed tires on a car has the end effect of lowering your final gear ratio, similar to the effect of using "overdrive". However, unlike simple gearing, the added weight and effort required to move those giant wheels in all gears causes an overall loss of gas mileage, so in addition to the loss of top speed and acceleration, it pretty much means you fail all around. You can look very "gangsta" in the process, though.

8. You completely missed half of each sentence. Negate the engine, the torque, and you are left with basic principles. At the wheel, at a constant RPM, you will go faster on a larger rim / taller tire. A move from 275/60 to a 275/70 tire would be near negligible to a decent motor, and probably add a mph overall. It's not worth piss from a significance standpoint, but it makes their statement false.

You should call up NASCAR and tell them to start putting 19" tires instead of 15" on all their race cars then.

If I was trying to convince them to do something silly, sure. I'm not however, and just saying that #8 isn't true.

You see that giant SUV with a four star rating? In a head on crash, it's better than the tiny car with a five star rating. You see, they don't compare cars across weight classes in the NHTSA ratings. They break them up in 250 pound increments, and the head on crash is done with a static wall, not another vehicle heading the other way. An SUV with four stars is definitely safer than that "five star" 2000 pound microcar when involved in a head on collision.

Many of the tiny cars aren't any better for rollovers than those huge SUVs - cheaper, smaller tires, less money spent on making them handle worth a damn, and less material to protect you when they DO roll over on you...

The only comparison you can make between size classes is the "side pole impact," and that tends to be a lower rating on smaller vehicles anyway.

I also remember reading that newer SUV's are less likely to roll over in an accident -- I forget what exactly it is but I think it had something to do with the suspension. Or maybe it's only the fancy SUV's (Escalade, Mercedes M-class)?

CmndrFish:Does this apply to cars where the body style is the only difference? I'm thinking like Accord and Accord Coupe and Altima and Altima Coupe. That a Camaro would have higher insurance than a Malibu would make sense, but those cars are quite a bit different. The first two pairs listed are functionally the same car.

Yes, I was speaking of year/make/model of sedan vs. same year/make/model of coupe. Comparing between different year/make/models, the year/make/model makes a bigger difference than sedan/coupe.

BKITU:CmndrFish: Does this apply to cars where the body style is the only difference? I'm thinking like Accord and Accord Coupe and Altima and Altima Coupe. That a Camaro would have higher insurance than a Malibu would make sense, but those cars are quite a bit different. The first two pairs listed are functionally the same car.

Yes, I was speaking of year/make/model of sedan vs. same year/make/model of coupe. Comparing between different year/make/models, the year/make/model makes a bigger difference than sedan/coupe.

That sort of stuff always blows my mind. Obviously the insurance companies have the numbers and they know which ones cost them more, but it's still whacky to me that there's a difference between sedan and coupe drivers of the same bloody car.

#10 While the author is correct that the myth is untrue, he is basing it on the fact that over 15 million Model T's were produced from 1908 to 1927. In 1908, and likely up until 1910, you could, in fact, get a Model T "in any color you wanted, as long as it was black"

#7. Again, the author is correct in that you are never asked what color your car is, you are also not asked a great many other details about your car that are revealed when you give the agent your VIN. The VIN is more than just a serial number for your car./Dad owns a 1921 Model T, mostly original.//was all original untill my son turned it upside down

Really, you don't know anyone that believes they need an oil change every 3k?

I doMy car is 23 years old and has 220,000 miles - it is from the time when that was requiredAlso, live in a small town, so 3,000 miles is twice a year. Get the winter oil in fall and the summer oil in spring.

I had 2 cars at once, back in the day: 1977 Buick Skylark. 1983 Porsche 944 Turbo. Cost of insurance? Skylark: 129/month. Porsche: 108/month. I told them again what the cars were and they repeated the quote. I told them that works out to almost $800 for 6 months on the Skylark, the car isn't even worth that much! But, they insisted because the model was considered a 'luxury model' in 77. I told them there was nothing luxurious about this 23 year old car, but they wouldn't budge. So, I had to drive my Porsche. Poor me.

Znuh:Larger tires change the final drive ratio of a vehicle, just as an overdrive reduces revs at a given speed, larger diameter tires alter the rev count as the tire is making less complete revolutions to cover the previous ground crossed by the smaller tire. Or: if a car with normal rims hits 2100 rpm at 60 mph, the larger diameter reduces that. This is why people who alter tire ratio end up having to correct the discrepancy at the speedometer.

That's the last Jalopnik article I'm ever reading.

They lost Murilee Martin to www.thetruthaboutcars.com a while ago. He was the only guy on Jalopnik worth reading.

natazha:HulkHands: Really, you don't know anyone that believes they need an oil change every 3k?

The Dodge dealership from which I purchased my Sprinter van is a firm believer in 3000 mile oil changes. "We don't pay any attention to the computer." The computer that is connected to viscosity and conductivity sensors and says I can go 15-16,000 between changes.

I've gotten sick of places outright lieing to me about vehicle maintenance issues. I refuse to go back to places if they do the 'my glass tech here...' shiat, or the 'bring the water pump in to the waiting room to ransom your car' thing, or the 'bring the customer to the back and spend 30 minutes going over procedures you 'could' do for him and explaining how all of his maintainance needs to be done despite telling you be just did it' fearmongering bullshiat.

I just wanted a farking oil change asshole. And now since you charged me 50$ goddamn dollars for that, and took 2 hours and tried to upsell me harder than a best buy crackwhore, you won't ever be getting that business again either.

CmndrFish:BKITU: CmndrFish: Does this apply to cars where the body style is the only difference? I'm thinking like Accord and Accord Coupe and Altima and Altima Coupe. That a Camaro would have higher insurance than a Malibu would make sense, but those cars are quite a bit different. The first two pairs listed are functionally the same car.

Yes, I was speaking of year/make/model of sedan vs. same year/make/model of coupe. Comparing between different year/make/models, the year/make/model makes a bigger difference than sedan/coupe.

That sort of stuff always blows my mind. Obviously the insurance companies have the numbers and they know which ones cost them more, but it's still whacky to me that there's a difference between sedan and coupe drivers of the same bloody car.

It has nothing to do with the drivers of the car, but rather the expected repair costs if there is damage to the car. The coverages where this applies, Comprehensive and Collision, are the coverages regarding damage to your own vehicle, regardless of fault. Collision covers... well, collisions with other vehicles and human beings. Comprehensive covers basically everything else -- animal strikes, storm damage, theft, vandalism, etc. Since there are significantly different damage repair costs for sedan vs. coupe of a given model, the coverages have different costs.

Liability coverages -- the coverages that pay out to other parties if you are at-fault in an accident -- are significantly more dependent on driver profiles, and the coverage actually changes little between different vehicles. Basically, if you yourself have a 2000 Honda Civic Coupe and only want liability coverage because it's kind of a beater at this point, your rate would be basically identical if you had a 2000 Honda Civic Sedan instead, or a 1993 Ford Taurus station wagon. You're not expected to be a significantly greater risk to others if you're driving Beater A vs. Beater B or Beater C.

some things i learned - so I was operating under myths before I knew these things...

Those quick oil change places commonly use recycled oil. Tell them you want bottled oil. Better yet, look for a case deal at an auto parts store and bring your own bottles. And the filters they install are utter crap - bring your own filter too. I also give them a bottle of BG MOA to add every other oil change...

Apparently rotating slightly more worn front tires (on a front wheel drive car) to the back for better vehicle control in slippery conditions is a no-no. One apparently gets better traction leaving the good tires on the back (whoa). I just bought new tires on the wife's car today, but this one still has me scratching my head..

And, FWIW, my manufacturer says I need to use premium fuel (~93 octane) in my car, so I do. I live in a place where gas is relatively cheap, and I can afford it, so I do.

I do every-3K oil changes on my one car, but A. it's nineteen years old and has nearly 300K, and B. I do the oil changes myself with good high-mileage oil and Purolator filters (I detest Fram,) bought in bulk to save money, so it's not costing me any more than the every-5K changes the manual called for when it was new would run if I had them done at a shop.

That, and the praise and thanks I get from my husband whenever I do oil changes and other car-maintenance chores is totally worth it. He has a Browncoat's fondness for ladies covered in engine grease, and I've known guys with stranger kinks.

And given where I live, I think SUVs are six and one-half-a-dozen with smaller cars for safety. We have enough sharp curves that we see a lot of SUVs on their sides, but we also get snow, which the little front-wheel-drive econoboxes just aren't great at unless you know what you're doing and have the discipline to slow down when things get icy. A good driver can be good in anything, but a bad driver will suck more in a car that they're not used to or which they've been told to expect more from by marketing than is really there.